How many died when Punjab was bleeding (dif. kind of question)

[GtLoc]

If as I see here: A quote from Kute Di Pooch Singh Gill: "The combined impact of these initiatives was that, by January 1989, the
terrorists had been pushed into a thin strip along the Pakistan border,
with over 70 per cent of their strikes restricted to just three of the
twelve districts in Punjab – Gurdaspur, Amritsar and Ferozepur."

Then it is not too far to assume that 70%+ of all deaths were also in those three districts.

With a current day population touching about 7 million it is not too far to assume about half that 20-30 years ago.

3-400k dead;

Being from the Doab, my mom for example can tell me about stuff that happened, she doesn't talk about it a lot, but it seems that no-one directly from my nuclear family was killed.

I am wondering how different it is for those three districts, as in if I assume that over 1/3rd of the male youth for example (below 30-35? above 12??) were killed is thaat about accurate.

The reason is, I'm trying to see how much of India's strategy is literally butchering everyone and if there's any order to it.

They talk about 4 point plans, and in the end they did kill many of the mukhis of the jathe but how much of that is luck.

Seeing this man's interview (former BSF officer) it points to just a butchering, but then why is it only Punjab's insurgency that was 'quelled'.

Is it due to us cutting down the jungles, so therefore not having cover of those like in the NE (possibility).

Or what?

I understand I can be 90% sure, but would rather have more voices to hear and yea..

Pretty much that's it.

[GtLoc]

I remember Khalra saying 25k in tarn taran alone which is 1/2 the population of the city today so maybe not from Tarn Taran alone.

I want to get a scale of how far they went, as I was only born after 92.